Israel can be considered a terrorist state, according to its own definition

Israel has displayed its very own hypocrisy in a propaganda video of which their defence force has disseminated. The video, which can be viewed below,
publicly displays Israel's definition of terrorism:

'Terrorism: Systematic use of violence and intimidation against civilians.'

This definition made me laugh. No, not because the definition itself is wrong, but because they themselves can be considered terrorists by applying
their very own definition.

If we consider the actions committed against the Palestinian people, by the Israeli government, one is able to discern that they can be considered
terrorists:

Do they use systematic violence and intimidation against the Palestinian people? Yes. Yes, they do.

The systematic imposition of settlements, as well as the systematic bombardment of civilians, are clear examples of the use of intimidation and
violence. Here are some examples:

Meron was a child survivor of the Holocaust and has since become one of the world’s leading authorities on the laws of war and a judge on the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

His advice was unequivocal, and today he sticks to it. He said: “Civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes explicit provisions
of the Fourth Geneva Convention.”

When General Moshe Dayan in 1968 proposed building Israeli towns on the West Bank he blithely conceded: “Settling Israelis in administered
territories, as is known, contravenes international conventions ... “

Indeed, the Fourth Geneva Convention would appear to leave no room for argument. It states: “The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts
of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”

The above was written by the former foreign minister of Australia, Bob Carr.

Here, it is clear that Israel had, and still is, violating international law in the imposition of Israeli settlements. How does this constitute
intimidation though? Simply, the people are being intimidated by being forced off of their lands, at the behest by not only Israeli settlers, but the
Israeli government also:

Israeli settlers used two bulldozers to raze a six-dunam area of Palestinian land near the West Bank city of Bethlehem under the protection of the
Israeli occupation forces.

Head of village council of Kaysan, Hussein Ghazal said the bulldozers, which were protected by the Israeli occupation forces, levelled the Palestinian
land and olive trees.
According to Ghazal, the settlers and the Israeli army have been intimidating the Palestinians in that area for a long time. They prevent
landowners from reaching their property. He said the Israeli movement in the area is part of an effort to expand the nearby settlement.

If this isn't enough, the Palestinian people are further intimidated and harmed by the settlers. As Amnesty puts it:

Israeli settlers in the Occupied Territories have stepped up attacks against Palestinians and are waging a campaign of intimidation against
international and Israeli human rights activists. Their aim is to eliminate the presence of witnesses to their attacks, thereby depriving the local
Palestinian population of this only form of limited protection.

...

Rather than taking steps to stop and prevent such attacks and hold Israeli settlers accountable, the Israeli army and security forces have responded
by imposing further restrictions on the local Palestinian population.

...

Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories, established by Israel in violation of international law, are the main reason for the stringent
restrictions imposed on the Palestinian population. Some three-and-a-half million Palestinians are prevented from moving between towns and villages;
confined to isolated enclaves and cut off from their workplace, their land, health and education facilities and other crucial services.

This is done to keep Palestinians away from Israeli settlements and from the network of roads built for the exclusive use of some 380,000 Israeli
settlers. Settlements also continue to be expanded and new ones to be set up on expropriated Palestinian land.

Jewish settlers in the West Bank are conducting a systematic and expanding campaign of violence against Palestinian farmers, families and children
with the Israeli authorities turning a blind eye, according to confidential reports from senior European Union officials.

...

The campaign of intimidation is especially targeted at Palestinian farmers and their livelihood, the reports found, noting that settlers damaged or
destroyed Palestinian olive groves en masse.

...

The Israeli authorities are accused of structuring their security operations to minimise the cost to the settlers of the campaign of harassment,
intimidation and violence.

....

The Israeli authorities' failure to resolve 92% of 600 reported incidents by April last year effectively encouraged the settlers to step up the
violence, the report argued, adding that the perception had been created that "settler violence enjoys the tacit support of the state of
Israel".

While the Israeli government does not have a direct hand in the above, the very fact that they turn a blind eye to it, shows that they support, the
systematic violence and intimidation imposed on the Palestinian population.

In addition to the clear violent and intimidating actions conducted against the Palestinians, countries belonging to the EU have become impatient and
are warning their citizens not to do business in the settlements, as they consider the settlement programs to be illegal:

The European Union's Ambassador to Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen, warned on Friday that a growing number of EU states are "losing their patience"
with Israel and urging their citizens not to do business with companies registered in Israeli settlements.

Israel has justified its civilian settlements by stating that a temporary use of land and buildings for various purposes appears permissible under
a plea of military necessity and that the settlements fulfilled security needs. The United Nations affirmed the principle of international law that
the continuation of colonialism in all its forms and manifestations is a crime and that colonial peoples have the inherent right to struggle by all
necessary means at their disposal against colonial Powers and alien domination in exercise of their right of self-determination.

The above content only deals with the Israeli settlements, and how the government and its people, are implicated in the systematic use of intimidation
and violence against the Palestinians. We haven't even touched on Gaza yet...I find that this image sums things up perfectly:

When they built the iron dome defence system they knew rockets would be coming for years to come. If they were truly threatened by the Palestinians
then why would they design a defence system that could MANAGE the rocket attacks rather than employing political and/or military actions that would
end the conflict.

The more Israel oppresses the Palestinians, the more rockets get fired. The more rockets get fired, the more military oppression can be applied. The
more military oppression is applied, the more rocket attacks.... This is child's play except children are dying and Israel has no remorse.

All this comes as the recent Israeli bombings on Gaza, have resulted in a death toll of near 100, with most of the dead being civilians. This current
system of violence, perpetrated against the Palestinian population, also falls under the Israeli definition of terrorism.

Yes. They are targeted on specific areas for the purposes of intimidation, violence and destruction. Israel excuses itself by saying that Hamas
shouldn't hide behind civilians. That doesn't matter, as they are still exercising systematic violence against a civilian population, by bombing
crowded areas.

Are the intimidation tactics, used by the Israeli's systematic?

Yes. Depriving the Palestinians of basic human rights are clearly intimidating, as they are treated as second class citizens. They live with fear,
under constant threat of attack and destablisation.

Do the actions of Israel constitute terrorism, under their very own definition?

If they were truly threatened by the Palestinians then why would they design a defence system that could MANAGE the rocket attacks rather than
employing political and/or military actions that would end the conflict.

Because if you can't play the eternal victim then you don't get the billions in cash and free weapons. Hitler would be happy of the nation that he
helped to build because the Zionist are applying his tactics quite well.

originally posted by: stirling
Its obvious the Jews are as bad as the Nazis in many ways.....
It certainly goes to show that Gods chosen people are simply human like the rest of the world......and they have no divine favour.....

Not Jews Zionist. The Zionist are to blame for this mess. The number of Jews that do not support Israel and it's actions keeps growing.

Israel excludes themselves from the rules and ideas because they are not goyim. They are above us lowly humans who have decency, laws, rules,
conscience, morals, respect.

Israel is the biggest terrorist state in the world. They are one of the biggest human rights violators in the world. Besides the USA, Israel is one of
the biggest war-mongers in the world. The US government has been infiltrated and controlled by these terrorists. They have no problem sending the
goyims kids to die in genocidal wars for them. That's why they like to pat vets on the back in the media, but behind the scenes, they could care less
about them(reference the VA scandal).

They use the USA as a tool for their terrorism. The create false-flag attacks to make it seem that the enemy of Israel is attacking everyone else, so
everyone else "must act".

Let me start of by saying that I am in no way stating that i denounce or support any of the actions taken by the Israeli state however when the OP
says that......

This definition made me laugh. No, not because the definition itself is wrong, but because they themselves can be considered terrorists by applying
their very own definition.

You're opening up a whole can of worms.

Firstly the definition is not wrong, it is the state that defines the world not what you subjectively understand the word to mean or what the state
your reside defines it as. If that is how Israel defines terrorism then for any discussion pertaining to that state, that is how it is defined.
Although I must say I would imagine that the definition of terrorism under Israeli law is probably more complex than a handful of words.

So no their definition is not wrong, but the real question at the heart of this thread is not so much the definition of the word but rather if by its
own definition Israel is a "terrorist".

I would have to say no, the reason for this comes down the the conundrum presented by non-state and state actors. Can a state actor in itself be
regarded as a "terrorist" organisation in the same way as say Hezboullah or Al-Qa'ida, I would have to say no because otherwise we are insinuating
that the entire state and all it entitles is part of the terrorist machine. A non-State actor on the other had such as Hezbouallah or Al-Qa'ida is
easier to label as "terrorist" organisation if they meet the definition.

Then we get on to the idea of state sponsored terrorism which can get a little murky.....

But on the whole I would have to say that by its own definition i would not call Israel a terrorist state because I do not believe that state actors
can be labelled as terrorists.

I actually have no qualms with their definition. It is 2:30 am here, and when i wrote it, it may not have came out as intended. What i meant was, that
even if the definition is correct, i believed that the actions of Israel could amount to terrorism by applying their very own definition. I apologise
for the confusion.

As for my labelling of Israel a terrorist state. I said that in consideration of their actions, which actually do amount to violence and intimidation.
That means, that the government of Israel is conducting terrorism, if you go by the definition stated in their video.

It doesn't matter whether they could be considered a terrorist actor or not. Their actions constitute terrorism by the definition stated in their
video. That is what i was getting act. I'm not intending to call them terrorists. Just pointing out that they could be considered terrorists, by
going of their definition of 'terrorism'.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
When they built the iron dome defence system they knew rockets would be coming for years to come.

of course they knew the rockets would be coming for years. the Palestinians, indeed a lot of countries in the region have stated ever since they
became a country they would wipe them out. they have also continually through the years proven that that it is not an idle threat.

If they were truly threatened by the Palestinians then why would they design a defence system that could MANAGE the rocket attacks rather than
employing political and/or military actions that would end the conflict.

what political actions do you suggest that would actually stop it? the UN is just as useless as the old League Of Nations it replaced at actually
stopping anything. how many wars, genocides, territorial disputes have they stopped cold or solved? hell even the US and Canada ignore what the UN
requests/demands they do when it suits their purpose. the only thing the Palestinians (and others) would accept is the destruction of Israel,
so even talks would be a moot point since there is no way Israel would grant that. it is called irreconcilable differences.

why haven't they tried direct military actions to end the conflict? are you seriously asking that? just what would your reaction be if tomorrow
the entire Israeli forces were brought to bear on the Palestinians, which would have civilian death tolls be insanely high like say MOST of
them KILLED in the fighting? this would happen since the Palestinian forces are fighting a guerrilla war, including the fact they HIDE among the
civilians, even fire their rockets from areas where civilians are including things like hospitals and schools. they get lots of nice press from that
showing the world all the "innocent lives lost" when Israel targets the rocket's firing location. so would you tell us all about "how happy you
are that it happened", because it proved they were willing to dish out that death and win the war? or would you condemn them further for those
actions?

The more Israel oppresses the Palestinians, the more rockets get fired. The more rockets get fired, the more military oppression can be
applied. The more military oppression is applied, the more rocket attacks.... This is child's play except children are dying and Israel has no
remorse.

well that is one way you could see it, but there is another equally true way to look at it.

the more the Palestinians fire rockets, the more Israel oppresses the Palestinians. the more Israel oppresses the Palestinians, (and does
things like bomb the launch areas). the more rockets they fire (plus other attacks). continually repeat. this is child's play, except children are
dying and the Palestinians have no remorse.

Respectfully I would disagree simply because i do not think it is possible to label a state as a terrorist organisation and there is no clear
international definition of terrorism that would facilitate such a label.

There is however another avenue that puts a even more deplorable mark on the State of Israel. War Criminal. I am almost certain that under the rules
set out under the Fourth Geneva Convention that they could quite deserving on the designation "War Criminal".

of course they knew the rockets would be coming for years. the Palestinians, indeed a lot of countries in the region have stated ever since they
became a country they would wipe them out. they have also continually through the years proven that that it is not an idle threat.

Yes, there have been threats against Israel, but Israel's retaliatory actions never help the situations at hand.

what political actions do you suggest that would actually stop it? the UN is just as useless as the old League Of Nations it replaced at actually
stopping anything.

The peace negotiations earlier in the year seemed to have been working alright...until Israel backed out on an agreed term.

How many wars, genocides, territorial disputes have they stopped cold or solved?

They obviously haven't done anything to stop the war crimes committed by Israel, even though they have publicly condemned them over the years.

Hell even the US and Canada ignore what the UN requests/demands they do when it suits their purpose.

Indeed.

The only thing the Palestinians (and others) would accept is the destruction of Israel, so even talks would be a moot point since there is no
way Israel would grant that. it is called irreconcilable differences.

Incorrect.

Mahmoud Abbas (current Palestinian statesman) and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation publicly acknowledge the state of Israel. Hamas does not,
however.

I think it is quite obvious that Israel just doesn't want to give up the land of which they have colonised.

If they were truly threatened by the Palestinians then why would they design a defence system that could MANAGE the rocket attacks rather than
employing political and/or military actions that would end the conflict.

Because if you can't play the eternal victim then you don't get the billions in cash and free weapons. Hitler would be happy of the nation that he
helped to build because the Zionist are applying his tactics quite well.

First of all I wouldn't be Israel. I would be a Jewish man looking for a safe community to raise my family and live out my life. I would enter
Palestine with my head bowed in respect to the current residence.

Quietly and calmly I would integrate myself and my family into the already established society. Learn to speak the language and live out my life
peacefully knowing full well that these people owe me nothing and be greatfull for letting me in.
But hey I am just a peaceful bloke with respect for all life. I am not Israeli in other words.

If they were truly threatened by the Palestinians then why would they design a defence system that could MANAGE the rocket attacks rather than
employing political and/or military actions that would end the conflict.

Because if you can't play the eternal victim then you don't get the billions in cash and free weapons. Hitler would be happy of the nation that he
helped to build because the Zionist are applying his tactics quite well.

Is it far fetched to assume that the Zionists WERE the Nazi's?

Hitler sent enough supplies and heavy equipment to start a nation to the Zionist in Palestine. Not to mention many of his Generals and Admirals were
also Zionist.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.